On 12/12/05, Hubert Rabago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Some of the code that's an integral part of Struts are in commons, > such as BeanUtils and Chain. If the shared code is not > tomahawk/myfaces specific, then this sounds like more reason to put > this in a "commons"-type package. It sounds like anyone out there > building in-house components might be able to use the package. It > might benefit as well from the additional exposure.
Yes, that's what we're discussing. MyFaces is likely going to be releasing this as a "shared" or "commons" jar in the future. In some ways, you can look at tomahawk as a demo or example set of the shared component-building library :) On 12/12/05, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You're still not understanding what I'm saying. I'm talking about a > situation in which someone wants to use Shale with the RI and it *will not > work* without some extra pieces from MyFaces. That doesn't make sense to me, > and it's not going to go over well with some organisations that want to > standardise on the RI. I understand what you're saying. Maybe you're not understanding my reply. You can use Tomahawk (and the underlying shared component jar) without using the MyFaces implementation. End-users already use tomahawk components with the RI. Tomahawk is JSF-implementation-agnostic, and so is the underlying shared code. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
